Hugucinogens

For the record, you’re right after all, I was assuming things about Israel (that it’s a country with more than one generation of people having lived there lol) that are apparently untrue.

What you said about them all having more than one citizenship, is really interesting and telling of the reality there.

This is the comment of the interaction I realized how that place just isn’t a normal country.

Society being roughly the same thing with nationality, is just the truth of other, poorer places. The privilege to “be able to leave”, is not universal, and also currently under attack btw, which is why I was wrongly trying to extend grace to such people over there.

Israel is a fake country though, apparently (not snark, I mean it word for word), and I was extending grace to a 100 year-old settler-colonial rich-guy sadism-retreat.

The argument for ai investment is basically a threat:

“give us money so that when everything goes to Shit, upended by our AI General Hyperintelligence, you’re on the winning side”.

“Very bad” is the literal selling point. The more dangerous and powerful and unstoppable from outside the prompt screen, the more the promise to the investors is delivered.

I mean, I fully agree with what you’re saying, as long as this sentence is true:

“Israelites who desire to leave Israel, can do so”.

Is it? I come from a poorer country, where “leaving” is something many people want to do, but not so many can. It takes a lot of money and/or financial security to leave your homeland, in our case, and that includes the wealthier part of European countries, moving to the less wealthy ones. Same currency, no passport required, and it’s still difficult.

Maybe Israel is different, being a younger, richer, more artificially developed country (mostly non-natives). I have no idea.

I mean it literally, when I say this:

Maybe this specific country(Israel), due to historical and material reasons, functions differently than other countries, and the identity of “Israeli” shouldn’t get the same treatment as other national identities.

As a thought, all that sounds to me “too convenient to be true”, but boy, do you find me lacking in historical context.

Aggregate public opinion, both the real, and especially through bullshit polls during authoritarian (read: dangerous) times, is at the whims of the government.

If the government bombards people with an idea, people without a robust opinion, will believe it.

Hate the people who act. The government, and the part of the public that is taking real Zionist action, participating in the ideology.

As I said in the other comment, the idea of “Israelis” is not real enough to justify hating the group. Putting all of them in the same basket is racism, because many of them (perhaps 20%, doesn’t change my argument), have neither the desire nor the power to contribute to the genocide, and part of those is fighting against.

Name the groups you hate by their real characteristic (violent fascists), because hating “people of a nation” is just being racist, and missing what the actual danger is.

The government is fascistic. The people in the government, and those who support it, are fascists. “Society”, means all the people together, just like in the above comment, “Israelis” are all the citizens.

“All the citizens of a place” is not a group you can just bunch up, that’s just racism.

There isn’t actually anything connecting them, apart from birthplace.

Bunch up groups with real stuff they have in common: Beliefs (Zionism in this case), or money (rich people and their suck ups), or real societal role (cops, military).

Those things are real. “Nationality” (one step removed from “race”) is not real. Don’t fall for the intellectual trap, that any of that matters as to which people are “good” or "bad

Nah, there’s plenty Israelis fighting for Palestine, and against their government. If it was “far-right Zionists”, then I’d agree

It’s a joke by hyperbole. Or someone being silly.

High quality edit

This is so cute it’s making me cry 😭

It’s many other things, but sure, one of them is this too.

These are all complicated, and every country is different, but a necessary part of the short term solution, is to focus on the people doing the manipulating, and fighting them, and their interests.

Long term, right-wing nonsense doesn’t hold up, and you can convince people, and help them move past that if they let go, but short term, they are just subservient to whatever the head of the movement-cult says.

The people leading those movements, are people. In very, very extreme cases, Luigi can help, but most of the time, they’re rich fucks who want to get richer.

Direct opposition to their interests, works.

Greece where I’m from, has a “sold out government” problem, and our public sector is being dismantled and sold for parts, but there’s a few tiny victories, where the routes for capital investment are blocked, in the last few years. Both 1) Anarchist squats block international hotel chain investment firms, and 2) beureaucratic safety laws do hold up, and block private colleges from trying to make a quick buck, resulting in reduced political pressure against the public education system.

Fighting on whichever level one has capacity for, works, whether it’s from inside or outside the law. Just make it more expensive for the rich fucks to get richer.

Did you just… Does your primary argument contain “Hopefully, not many of us have to die.” ???

Jesus Christ.

Look, you’re right that it’s just as impossible to convince a zealot (idiots who stand to gain from being obedient), as it is to insult someone back into logic (idiots who don’t, but are too stupid to realize).

But don’t despair and give up, because you’ll be giving fascists what they invested for, with all their propaganda aimed at making you despair.

Just keep in mind, the way to change things is not to fight the vulnerable zealots for their cooperation with the authoritarian, it’s to fight the authoritarian. The rich fucks are the ones who give the speeches, and lie and manipulate the zealots.

Fight the rich fucks, and fight them as early as possible. That’s what nipping this in the bud (or in this case, early stalk lol) means.

How dare you speak this way about SatansMagottyCumFart.

You insult their honor.

The problem is being a landlord as a job. The problem is rich people buying up housing (or land and building on it) they don’t use, in order to rent for profit.

It’s about everyone who has no house. All the people who have no alternative, apart from renting from some rich people.

If someone “allowed” others to live in his house, without demanding half their salary, you wouldn’t see me complaining.

And the reason that buying or building a house is so expensive, is explicitly because rich people clamber over each other, to make the best investment of their lives: Housing.

One heavily oversimplified answer, from the many possible ideas, is:

Nationally built cheap housing, with minimal or no rent. That means, housing as a public good, like nationally owned water and electricity companies.

Hm, I see your point about clarity.

My original comment “landlords shouldn’t be allowed to own houses” was a joke, in the sense that it is an impossible paradox, with the implied statement being “landlords shouldn’t exist”.

That is indeed the prevailing view on this platform, because it’s a leftist/marxist/anarchist platform, mostly.

I might not be the right person to give you a pointer directly into the theory of those, but I have a number of YouTubers I really like, that talk about these issues, and make incredibly good explanations.

Two I’m really into, lately, are NonCompete, and Unlearning Economics, that have some great video essays, the first one about communist perspectives, the second going in depth against things that are considered “common sense” in capitalist economics, and their real results when actually looked at.

I’d say you can click on their channels and click whatever interests you most (NonCompete has a video on thought terminating clichés lol), but I can also recommend a couple specific videos:

On NonCompete, there’s a video that contains a pretty good explanation of what is called the class war, that is, what tools the rich use, to keep the poor working. Housing costing so much, is one of those tools.

On Unlearning Economics, there is a personal favorite of mine, Free stuff is good actually. It’s more about the adjacent philosophies, but you can easily extrapolate from it, to housing, if you like spending an hour listening to a guy talking about economics lol.

Internet comments are so bad at conveying rich ideas, and so easy to not notice the humanity behind people, that it’s refreshing to have people like you answer, with the honest intent behind what they wrote. I hope what I sent interests you!

I’d hope it was a thought commencing slogan, maybe giving people curiosity as to think:

“How could another sapient person believe something so different from my own beliefs? That person is even making it a joke, therefore they must have had it bouncing around in their brain a bunch, so they must believe it and think about it a lot. Huh, maybe there is something more to know, and think about.”

I even made a comment with a small answer, to the other person, who asked like a human.

Clearly didn’t work on you though.

Imagine houses that don’t cost nine and a half fortunes, because they are not considered one of the most profitable ways to invest, for the richest people in the world.

Housing doesn’t have to be prohibitively expensive, whether temporary or permanent residences.

It’s not about temporary living in a place not existing, it’s about forbidding the ways that rich people go about making housing scarce, and corner markets.

That was a kind of aggressive way for me to express that, but, in all seriousness, the reason is that:

Being a “landlord”, that is, very specifically, an “owner of houses you don’t live in, but rent to people for profit”, is a way to live that is inherently abusive to the people you rent to.

You have ownership of a basic good people need to survive (housing), which is effectively scarce (because it’s not allowed for just anyone to build a house without incredible amounts of money, even homelessness is fairly illegal in many places), and you say to people:

“Either give me a monthly fee for me to allow you to have a roof over your head, or I’m calling the police (the only people allowed to be violent in the country) to kick you out”

It’s a way of making money, where the owner doesn’t do anything helpful to society, except find people who are desperate to survive, and milk them of what they make.

Landlords shouldn’t be able to own homes.